Mr. Speaker, I am appalled to hear this kind of question from the member who is leading the campaign started by one of his colleagues to do away with supply management.

We have created a $350-million investment fund to support the sector in response to the new agreement. That money will help dairy producers and processors adapt to new market conditions and help them make strategic investments. Farmers are investing, and we will contribute to those investments. We met with industry representatives, and we created a program based on the comments we received.

Mr. Speaker, experts from the Conference Board of Canada, the Bank of Montreal, the TD Bank, the parliamentary budget officer, and the Department of Finance have all said there are no signs of economic growth.

Zero new full-time jobs have been created since the Liberals took office. Less than 1% of infrastructure projects have started construction. The Liberals promised Canadians that deficits would create jobs and grow the economy. Clearly, their plan is not working.

Would the minister explain to Canadians why he has failed to create one single job from his infrastructure announcements?

Mr. Speaker, again, let me take the opportunity to tell the House and Canadians that since taking office, our government has approved more than 980 projects throughout the country, with the combined value of more than $12 billion, from coast to coast to coast.

In fact, one project is in the member's own city, helping design the long-term LRT plan, which will help her city to advance so it can take on the opportunities to build more infrastructure when we announce our long-term plan for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the infrastructure bank is much like the Liberal ministers' fundraising cocktails: reserved for a select group of Liberal friends.

The government must be really out of touch with reality and the regions if it intends to set up a bank that will finance only projects worth at least $100 million. That means nothing will flow to smaller towns and cities.

Which of the 40 government MPs from Quebec will stand up for the interests of Quebec's regions?

Mr. Speaker, let me share this again. Since taking over, we have approved more than $1.5 billion for projects in Quebec. In fact, the Minister of Finance announced $2 billion for small communities. This is unheard of in recent Canadian history. We are delivering on behalf of Canadians throughout the country, big cities, small cities, as well as rural communities.

Let me quote what the president of FCM had to say about our infrastructure plan. He said, “These unprecedented infrastructure investments—

Mr. Speaker, young Canadians work hard to put themselves through school so they can get a great paying job, buy a house and perhaps raise a family. However, they are being told by the Minister of Finance that they should get used to more precarious work.

The Liberals cancelled the small business tax cuts. Increasing payroll and carbon taxes will make it harder for young workers to get their first job. Even if they are lucky enough to start working and to save what is left after they pay their student loans and these Liberal tax hikes, fewer now qualify for a mortgage.

Will the government explain why it is making life harder for young Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the member's question gives me an opportunity to indicate how seriously we are working to address the challenges being faced by young people in Canada, unprecedented changes occurring in Canada and all first world countries, in fact, the whole world.

We not only doubled the number of work opportunities in the summer, but we will be rolling out an intensive and comprehensive program, called “work integrated learning”, in co-operation with the business community.

Mr. Speaker, not only have the Liberals left women behind with their new CPP legislation, but seniors everywhere are still waiting for the Liberals to deliver on their promise of a new seniors price index.

Here we are in November and the Liberals have failed to come through with their promise of a better way to index old age security and guaranteed income supplement benefits. Seniors are struggling to make ends meet with the high cost of living.

If the Liberals cannot keep this promise, could the minister tell us what other promises to our seniors he is prepared to break?

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that my hon. colleague has given us an opportunity to talk about how, once in power, the Canadian government quickly took action by implementing important measures to help our seniors, particularly those who are less fortunate.

We increased the guaranteed income supplement, which helped 900,000 Canadian seniors. We made massive investments in housing, which is helping 200,000 less fortunate Canadians. We will continue to work very hard to meet the needs and expectations of seniors in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, last month, a UN committee voted in favour of complete nuclear disarmament. Unfortunately, Canada did not support that initiative. While other countries are moving forward and working hard on this file, this government is dragging its feet.

Will Canada show some leadership, support the efforts being made toward nuclear disarmament, and participate in the negotiation process that will begin next year?

Mr. Speaker, the minister is entirely dedicated to nuclear disarmament. Our goal is to convince countries that have nuclear weapons to be at the table as part of an effective disarmament process. Canada succeeded at this recently when we led a United Nations resolution supported by 177 states, including those with nuclear weapons.

Our resolution has a goal to stop the production of materials used to make nuclear weapons. This is the realistic, pragmatic approach our minister is taking, and it is a major accomplishment.

Mr. Speaker, climate change policy should tangibly reduce greenhouse gas emissions without punishing the Canadian economy. The problem with the Liberals' approach is that we know they have no evidence to show it is actually going to work, that it is actually going to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, we do know that it is going to cost the Canadian economy and cost Canadian families.

Under our former government, we actually saw greenhouse gas emissions decrease, while the economy grew. I have a very simple question. What price elasticity assumptions did the government use in modelling its carbon tax?

Jonathan WilkinsonLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to creating a cleaner, more innovative economy that reduces emissions and protects the environment, while creating well-paying jobs for Canadians. Setting a benchmark price on carbon pollution is one component of a broad approach to addressing climate change—something that the previous government did nothing to address—while providing certainty and predictability to businesses.

After a decade of inaction on the part of the previous government, we are about taking firm action to address greenhouse gas emissions, while creating good middle-class jobs for Canadians.

Let us go with something more simple. Right now, the Liberals are putting uncertainty into the regulatory process for natural resources. They are not doing anything for Canadians who are out of work in Alberta. They are not standing up for the development of new pipelines. They are putting a carbon tax in place that is going to do nothing for greenhouse gas emissions. I could go on and on.

If they cannot answer that questions, why do they not have the courage to call it for what it is: national energy program 2.0?

Jonathan WilkinsonLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Mr. Speaker, I suggest the hon. member listen to some of the voices of Canadian industry, companies like Suncor, Enbridge, and Shell, who are in support of a carbon price as part of an overall economic strategy, and a strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Let me quote the Desjardins Group CEO, who said:

Desjardins Group supports the Federal Government's decision.... Desjardins believes that the time has come for all sectors of the economy to include climate change considerations into their strategic plans, to take advantage of business opportunities, to reduce risks and to meet the needs of Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, my friend, Lawrence Morris, is a retired senior, who lives in Fort Assiniboine on a very limited income. A carbon tax will significantly increase his costs for groceries, his costs for his heat bill, and his costs for gasoline, to the point that he may not be able to stay in his home. This is a reality for many rural seniors across Canada. Why are the Liberals pushing a carbon tax on rural Canadians and forcing seniors like Mr. Morris out of their homes?

Jonathan WilkinsonLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Mr. Speaker, unlike the Conservatives, we are focused on supporting middle-class families at every stage of their lives. Not only did the Conservatives vote against the Paris agreement when it comes to addressing climate change, but they also voted against reducing taxes for nine million Canadians. They voted against a child benefit that helps nine out of 10 Canadian families and will raise 300,000 Canadian children out of poverty. They voted against enhancements to student loans, which will help 250,000 Canadian students.

Our government is focused on both protecting the environment and growing the economy in a sustainable way.

Mr. Speaker, whenever we point out that this carbon tax will hurt Canada's poor, they stand up and quote powerful millionaire and billionaire CEOs to defend their policy. The 800,000 Canadians who rely on the food bank in order to nourish their children every day do not take any comfort in quotes from millionaire CEOs. In fact, food bank use is up. Over 300,000 kids are relying on food banks for their nutrition.

Why is the Liberal government so determined to raise food prices by increasing taxes on the people who deliver our food?

Mr. Speaker, following my earlier colleague's comments on the fact that we are working very hard to grow the economy and to grow the middle class, and working very hard to decrease poverty among our children and seniors, I would be curious to know why our Conservative friends have been opposing, systematically, all measures working in favour of the middle class and toward lowering poverty in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations committee on discrimination against women has just expressed serious concerns with the inquiry into the murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. It says that the inquiry is not taking a human rights approach, that it does not have the mandate to look into policing, or look into unresolved cases.

These concerns echo exactly what we have heard from the families of missing and murdered mothers, daughters, and sisters. Will the government finally respond to these concerns, and will the government finally listen to the voices of families?

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to clarify the fact that the commission does indeed have the mandate to look into policing; does indeed have a broad mandate for them to do exactly what the families have asked for, which is to deal with the issue of the causes, and also making sure that the families will be supported, particularly with the new liaison units set up by the Minister of Justice to do just that.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced her intention to modernize the rules governing how the government provides bilingual services across Canada. That is good news. We applaud her for that.

However, the Liberal government seems to want to draw out the consultation process and will not finalize the new regulations until 2019. Really?

Will the Liberal government commit not to shelve the consultation report and to introduce a real bill that will ensure that these rules will continue to be strictly enforced over the long term?

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that the government will conduct a comprehensive review of the regulations governing the delivery of services to Canadians in order to ensure that minority anglophone and francophone communities are well served.

While the review is under way, the offices that had been slated to become unilingual under the current regulations will be subject to a moratorium. They will continue to provide services in both official languages until we introduce new and improved, modernized regulations to replace the current regulations.